E415 
.U58 















*^ ' - -^ C. ."Lr*^ *' °^ .I'd- 




•^'^ 








U. S. President, 1845-1849 (Polk) 

... Tariff of duties in the ports of Mexico. Message of ■<^' 

the President of the United States, in answer to a resolu- /A 

tion of the House of December 18, 1848, relative to the /^ 

establishment of a tariff of duties in the ports of Mexico, .'^ 

and the appropriation of the same. [Washington, 1848] '^ 

10 p. 24"". (30th Cong, 2d sess. House. Ex. doc. 29) 






1. U. S. — Hist. — War with Mexico, 1845-1848 — Finance, commerce, con- aX 

fiscations, etc. 2. Tariff — Mexico. /\ 







5^"^- 




>* 



.4 






f^O^ 









^* '^^ '^^ 
























•- '-^..0^ :. 



















^''^^ 



" -^o^ :M^n:^ ^^(<i oV^^^Da'- ^^<^ 



s*' y. 



v-o^ 



^^-nK 



^° .^^°- V 






.^^'^'^^ -J 




^r. ^r^.^\(P ^'^:y^o' ^^^ «^o ^r^.^\o^ 

























V';^ 
































<*. '»'•'** ^^ 



% -^^0^ : 




'bv" 




/ ^^ 















." ^ 









A** ••■'•♦ ^^ 










0^^ 



^0 

iq 



V^ 








^^-^^^ 



,o5°<^ 




: '^Afx'^ oV^^^^ia'- '^►^v-*' 






THIRTIETH CONGRESS— SECOND SESSION. 



Ex. Doc. No. 20. 



HOUSE OF REPRESEITATIVES. 



TARIFF OF DUTIES IN THE PORTS OF MEXICO. 



MESSAGE 



OF THF 



PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 



IN ANSWER TO 



A resolution of the House of December 18, 1848, relative to the 
establishment of a tariff" of duties in the ports of Mexico, and the 
appropriation of the same. 



January 3, 18^9. 

Referced to a Select Committee, and ordered to be printed. 



To the House of Representatives of the United States: 

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of 
the I8th of December, 1848, requesting information, "under what 
law or provision of the constitution, or by what other authority," 
the Secretary of the Treasury, with the "sanction and approval" 
of the President, established "a tariff of duties in the ports of the 
Mexican republic, during the war with Mexicoj" and "by what 
legal, constitutional, or other authority," the "revenue thus de- 
rived," was appropriated to "the support of the army in Mexico,' 
I refer the House to my annual message of the 7th of December, 
1847; to my message to the Senate of the 10th of February, 1848, 
responding to a call of that body, a copy of which is herewith 
communicated; and to my message to the Plouse of Representatives 
of the 24th of July, 1848, responding to a call of that House. The 
resolution assumes that the Secretary of the Tieasury "established 
a tariff df duties in the ports of the Mexican Republic." The con- 
tributions collected in this mode, were not established by the Se- 



2 Ex. Doc. No. 20. : 

i 

cretary of the Treasury, but by a military orJer issued by the 1 
President through the War and Navy Departments. For his infor- 
mation the Pre^ident directed the Secretary of the Treasury to 

prepare and report to him, a scale of duties. That report was I 

made, and the President's military order of the 31st of March, '■ 

1847, was based upon it. The documents communicated to Con- I 

gress with my annual message of December, 1847, show the true j 

character of that order. \ 

The authority under which military contribut'ons were exacted ! 
and collected from the enemy and applied to the support of our i 
army, during the war with Mexico, was stated in the several mes- 
sages referred to. In the first of these messages, I informed Con- 
gress, that " on the thirty-first day of March last, I caused an or- ; 
der to be issued to our military and naval commanders to levy and j 
collect a military contribution upon all vessels and merchandise ; 
which might enter any of the ports of Mexico in our military oc- ; 
cupation, and to apply such contributions towards defraying the \ 
expenses of the war. By virtue of the right of conquest and the .! 
laws of war, the conqueror, consulting his own safety or conve- , 
nience, may either exclude foreign commerce altogether from all | 
fciuch ports, or permit it upon such terms and conditions as he may ■ 
prescribe. Before the principal ports of Mexico were blockaded 
by our navy, the revenue derived from import duties, under the 
laws of Mexico, was paid into the Mexican treasury. After these 
ports had fallen into our military possession, the block.ide was 1 
raised, and commerce with them permitted upon prescribed terms | 
and conditions. They were opened to the trade of all nations j 
upon the payment of duties more moderate in their amount than j 
those which had been previously levied by Mexico; and the reve- ' 
nue, which was formerly paid inlo the Mexican treasury, was i 
directed to be collected by our military and naval officers, and ap- ' 
plied to the use of our army and navy. Care was taken that the i 
officers, soldiers and sailors of our army and navy, should be ex- ; 
empted from the operations of the order; and as the merchandise | 
imported, upon which the order operated, must be consumed by | 
Mexican citizens, the contributions exacted were, in effect, the I 
seizure of the public revenues of Mexico, and the application of 
them to our own use. In directing this mtasure, the object was to -; 
compel the enemy to contribute, as far as practicable, towards the i 
expenses of the war." \ 

It was also stated in that message, that " measures have recently I 
been adopted by which the internal as well as the external reve- 
nues of Mexico, in all places in our military occupation, will be ! 
seized and appropriated to the use of our army and navy. The : 
policy of levying upon the enemy contributions in every form, con- ; 
sistently with the laws of nations, which it may be practicable for 
our military commanders to adopt, should, in my judgment, be j 
rigidly enforced; and orders to this effect have accordingly been ; 
given. By such a policy, at the same time that our own treasury* ■ 
will be relieved from a heavy drain, the Mexican people will be 
made to feel the, burdens of the war, and; consulting their own ia- ! 



Ex. Doc. No 20. 3 

terestSj may be induced the more readily to require their rulers to 
accede to a just peace." 

In the same message, I informed Congress that the amount of the 
" loan" which would be required for the further prosecution of the 
war, might be "reduced by whatever amount of expenditures can 
be saved by military contributions collected in Mexico;" and that 
" the most rigorous measures for the augmentation of these contri- 
butions have been directed, and a very considerable sum is expected 
from that source." The Secretary of the Treasury, in his annual 
report of that year, in making his estimate of the amount of loan 
which would probably be required, reduced the sum, in considera- 
tion of the amount which would probably be derived from these 
contributions, and Congress authorized the loan upon this reduced 
estimate. 

In the message of the tenth of February, 1848, to the Senate, it 
was stated that "no principle is better established than that a nation 
at war has the right of shifting the burden off itself, and imposing it 
upon the enemy by exacting military contributions. The mode of 
making such exactions must I e left to the discretion of the conqueror, 
but it should be exercised in a manner conformable to the rules of 
civilized warfare. The right to levy these contributions is essential 
to the successful prosecution of war in an enemy's country, and the 
practice of nations has been in accordance with this principle. It 
is as clearly necessary as the right to fight battles, and its exercise 
is often essential to the subsistence of the army. Entertaining no 
doubt that the military right to exclude commerce altogether from 
the ports of the enemy in our military occupation, included the 
minor right of admitting it under prescribed conditions, it became 
an important question, at the date of the order, whether there 
should be a discrimination between vessels and cargoes belonging 
to citizens of the United States and vessels and cargoes belonging 
to neutral nations." 

In the message to the House of Representatives of the twenty- 
fourth of July, 1S4S, it was stated that "it is from the same source 
of authority that we derive the unquestioned right,. after the war 
has been declared by Congress, to blockade the ports and coasts 
of the enemy, to capture his towns, cities and provinces, and to 
levy contributions upon him for the support of our array. Of the 
same character with these is the right to subject to our temporal 
military government the conquered territories of our enemy. They 
are all belligerent rights, and their exercise is as essential to the 
successful prosecution of a foreign war as the right to fight battles." 

By the constitution the power to "declare war" is vested in Con- 
gress, and by the same instrument it is provided that "the Presi- 
dent shall be commander in chief of the army and navy of the Uni-> 
ted States," and that "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully 
executed." 

When Congress have exerted their power, by declaring war 
against a foreign nation, it is the duty of the President to prosecute 
it. The constitution has prescribed no particular niode in which 
he shall perform this duty. The manner of conducting the war is 



4 Ex. Doc. No. 20. 

not defined by the constitution. The term war^ used in that instru- 
ment, has a well understopd meaning among nations. That mean- 
ing IS derived from the laws of nations, a code which is recog- 
nized by all civilized powers, as being obligatory in a state of 
war. The power is derived from the constitution, and the manner 
of exercising it is regulated by the laws of nations. When Con- 
gress have declared war, they, in effect, make it the duty of the 
President in prftsecuting it, by land and sea, to resort to all the 
modes, and to exercise all the powers and rights which other na- 
tions at war possess. He is invested with the same power in this 
respect as if he were personally present, commanding our fleets by 
sea or our armies by land. He may conduct the war by issuing 
orders for fighting battles, besieging and capturing cities, conquer- 
ing and holding the provinces of the enemy, or by capturing his 
vessels and other property on the high seas. JBut these are not the 
only modes of prosecuting war which are recognized by the laws 
of nations, and to which he is authorized to resort. The levy of 
contributions on the enemy is a rigl^,t of war well established and 
universally acknowledged among nations, and one which every 
belligerent possessing the ability may properly exercise. The most 
approved writers on public law admit and vindicate this right, as 
consonant with reason, justice and humanity. 

No principle is better established than that ''we have a right to 
deprive our enemy of his possessions, of everything which may 
augment his strength and enable him to make war. This every 
one endeavors to accomplish in the manner most suitable to him. 
Whenever w^e have an opportunity, we seize on the enemy's pro- 
perty, and convert it to our own use; and thus, besides diminishing 
the enemy's power, we augment our own, and obtain at least a 
partial indemnification or e^juivalent, either for what constitutes 
the subject of the war, or for the expenses and losses incurred in ■ 
its prosecution; in a word, we do ourselves justice." "Instead of 
the custom of pillaging the open country and defenceless places," 
the levy of contributions has been " substituted." " Whoever car- 
ries on a justwar has a right to make the enemy's country contri- 
bute to the support of his army, and towards defraying all the 
charges of the war. Thus he obtains a part of what is due to him; 
and the enemy's subjects, by consenting to pay the sum demanded, 
have their property secured from pillage, and the country is pre- 
served." 

These principles, it is believed, are uncontroverted by any civil- 
ized nation in modern times. The public law of nations by which 
they are recognized, has been held by our highest judicial tribunal 
as a code which is applicable to our "situation" in a state of war, 
and binding on the United States; while in admiralty and maritime 
cases it is often the governing rule. It is in a just war that a 
nation has the " right to make the enemy's country contribute to 
the support of his army." Not doubting that our late war with 
Mexico was just on the part of the United States, I did not hesitate, 
when charged by the constitution with its prosecution, to exercise 
a power common to all other nations, and Congress was duly in- 



Ex. Doc. No. 20. 



formed of the mode and extent to which that power had been and 
would be exercisedj at the commencement of their first session, 
thereafter. 

Upon the declaration of war against Mexico by Congress, the 
United States were entitled to all the rights which any other nation 
at war would have possessed. These rights could only be demanded 
and enforced by the President, whose duty it wa's, as '' commander- 
in-chief of the array and navy of the United States," to execute the 
law of Congress which declared the war. In the act declaring war, 
Congress provided for raising men and money to enable the Presi- 
dent *' to prosecute it to a speedy and successful termination." 
Congress prescribed no mode of conducting it, but left the President 
to prosecute it according to the laws of nations, as his guide. In- 
deed, it would have been impracticable for Congress to have pro- 
vided for all the details r-f a campaign. 

The mode of levying contributions must necessarily be left to 
the discretion of the conqueror, subject to be exercised, however, 
in conformity with the laws of nations. It may be exercised by 
requiring a given sum, or a given ameunt of provisions to be fur- 
nished by the authorities of a captured city or province; it may be 
exercised by imposing an internal tax, or a tax on the enemy's 
commerce, whereby he may be deprived of his revenues, and these 
may be appropriated to the use of the conqueror. The latter mode 
was adopted by the collection of duties in the ports of Mexico, in 
our military occupation, during the late war with that republic. 

So well 'established is the military right to do this under the 
laws of nations, that our military and naval officers, commanding 
our forces on the theatre of war, adopted the same mode of levy- 
ing contributions from the enemy, before the order of the Presi- 
dent, of the 3lst of March, 1847, was issued. The general in com- 
mand of the army at Vera Cruz, upon his own view of his powers 
and duties, and without specific instructions to that effect, imme- 
diately after the capture of that city, adopted this mode. By his 
order of the twenty-eighth of March, 1847, heretofore communi- 
cated to the House of Representatives, he directed a "temporary 
and moderate tariff of duties to be established." Such a tarifi' was 
established, and contributions were collected under it and applied 
to the uses of our army. At a still earlier period, the same power 
was exercised by the naval oflTicers in command of our squadron on 
the Pacific coast. ** * * * * * * 

Not doubting the authority to res&rt to this mode, the order of the 
ihirty-first of March, 1847, was issued, and was, in effect, but a 
modification of the previous orders of these officers, by making the 
rates of contribution uniform, and directing their collection in all 
the ports ©f the enemy in our military occupation, and under our 
temporary military government. 

The right to levy contributions upon the enemy, in the form of 
import and export duties in his ports, was sanctioned by the treaty 
of peace with Mexico. By that treaty, both governments recog- 
nized, * * and confirmed the exercise of that right. By 
its provisions, "the custom-houses at all the ports occupied by the 



6 Ex. Doc. No. 20, 

forces of the United States," were, upon the exchange of ratifica- 
tions, to be delivered up to the Mexican authorities, "together with 

all bonds and evidences of debt for duties on importations and ex- I 
portations not yet fallen due^'' and "all duties on imports and on 
exports collected at such custom-houses, or elsewhere in Mexico, 

by authority of the United States," before the ratification of the ■ 

treaty by the Mexican government, were to be retained by the i 

United States; and only the nett amount of the duties collected i 

after this period, was to be "delivered to the Mexican govern- ' 

ment." By its provisions, also, all merchandise, "imported pre- i 

viously to the restoration of the custom-houses to the Mexican au- \ 

thorities," or "exported from any Mexican port, whilst in the oc- i 

cupation of the forces of the United States," was protected from ' 
confiscation and from the payment of any import or export duties 

to the Mexican government, even although the importation of ' 

such merchandise " be prohibited by the Mexican tariff." The j 

treaty, also, provides, that should the custom houses be surren- ' 

dered to the Mexican authorities In less than sixty days from the J 

date of its signature, the rates of duty on merchandise imposed i 

by the United States, weve, in that event, to survive the war, un- ! 

til the end of this period; and, in the meantime, Mexican custom- \ 
house officers were bound to levy no other duties thereon, "than the 

duties established by the tariff found in force at such custom-houses, ' 

at the time of the restoration of the same." The "tariff found in i 

force at such custom-houses," which is recognized and sustained by | 

this stipulation, was that established by the military order of the , 
thirty-first of March, 1847, as a mode of levying and collecting 

military contributions from the enemy. | 

The right to blockade the ports and coasts of the enemy in war j 

is no more provided for or prescribed by the cori.sti!ution than the ' 

right to levy and collect contributions from him in the form of ^ 

duties, or otherwise; and yet it has not been questioned that the ^ 

President had the power, after war had been declared by Congress, ' 

to order our navy to blockade the ports and coasts of Mexico. The j 

right in both cases exists under the laws of nations. If the Presi- j 

dent cannot order military contributions to be collected without an^ j 

act of Congress, for the same reason he cannot order a blockade; ;i 

nor can he direct the enemy's vessels to be captured on the high ' 

seas; nor can he order our military and naval officers to invade the ; 

enemy's country, conquer, hold and subject to our military govern- | 
ment his cities and provinces; nor can he give to our military and 
naval commanders orders to perform many other acts essential to 

success in war. i 

If, when the city of Mexico was captured, the commander of our | 

forces had found in the Mexican treasury public money which the ; 

enemy had provided to support his array, can it be doubted that he ] 

possessed the right to seize and appropriate it for the use of our , 

own army'? If the money captured from the enemy could have been I 
thus lawfully seized and appropriated, it would have been by virtue 
of the laws of war, recognised by all civilized nations; and by the 

same authority the sources of revenue and of supply of the enemy ! 



Ex. Doc. No,. 2a 7 

may be cut off from him, whereby he may be weakened and crip- 
pled in his means of coatinuing or waging the war. If the com- 
manders of our forces, while acting under the orders of the Presi- 
dent, in the heart of the enemy's country and surrounded by a 
hostile population, possess none of these essential and indispensa- 
ble powers of war, but must halt the army at every step of its pro- 
gress, and wait for an act of Congress to be passed to authorize 
them to do that which every other nation has the right to do by 
virtue of the laws of nations, then, indeed, is the government of 
the United States in a condition of imbecility and weakness, which 
must, in all future time, render it impossible to prosecute a foreign 
war in an enemy's country successfully^ or to vindicate the nation?;! 
rights and the national honor by war. 

The contributions levied were collected in the enemy's country, 
and were ordered to be "applied" in the enemy's country "towards 
defraying the expenses of the war," and the appropriations made 
by Congress for that purpose were thus relieved, and considerable 
balances remained undrawn from the treasury. The amount of con- 
tributions remaining unexpended at the close of the war, as far as 
the accounts of collecting and disbursing officers have been settled, 
have been paid into the treasury, in pursuance of an order for that 
purpose, except the sum "applied towards the payment of the first 
instalment due under the treaty with Pvlexico," as stated in my last 
annual message, for which an appropriation had been made by Con- 
gress. The accounts of some of these officers, as stated in the 
report of the Secretary of War, accompanying that message, will 
require legislation before they can be finally settled. 

In the late war with Mexico, it is confidently believed that the 
levy of contributions, and the seizure of the sources of public reve- 
nue, upon which the enemy relied to enable him to continue the war, 
essentially contributed to hasten peace. By those means the gov- 
ernment and people of Mexico were made to feel the pressure of 
the war, and to realize that, if it were protracted, its burdens and 
inconveniences must be borne by themselves. Notwithstanding the 
great success of our arms, it may well be doubted whether an hono- 
rable peace would yet have been obtained, but for the very contri- 
butions which were exacted. 

JAMES K. POLK. 

Washington, January 2, 1849. 



To the Senate of the United States: 

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 1st instant, re- 
questing to be informed whether "any taxes, duties, or imports" 
havebeen "laid and collected upon goods and merchandise belono-- 
ing to the citizens of the United States, exported by such citizens 
from the United Slates to Mexico: and, if so, what is the rate of such 
duties, and what amount has been collected; and, also, by what autho- 
rity of law the same have been laid and collected," I refer the Senate 



8 Ex. Doc. No. 20. 

to my annual message of the 7th of December last, in which I in- 
formed Congress that orders had been given to our military and | 
naval commanders in Mexico to adopt the policy, as far as practi- i 
cable, of levying military contributions upon the enemy for the i 
support of our army. ' 

As one of the n^odes adopted for levying such contributions, it 
was staled in that message, that ''on the 3ist of March last, I ' 
caused an order to be issued to our military and naval commanders i 
to levy and collect a military contribution upon all vessels and i 
merchandise which might enter any of the ports of Mexico in our j 
military occupation, and to apply such contributions towards de- ' 
fraying the expenses of the war. By virtue of the right of con- 
quest and the laws of war, the conquerer, consulting his own ; 
safety or convenience, may either exclude foreign commerce alto- i 
gether from all such ports, or permit it upon such terms and con- | 
ditions as he may prescribe. ; 

"Before the principal ports of Mexico were blockaded by our \ 
navy, the revenue derived from import duties, under the laws of ; 
Mexico, was paid into the Mexican treasury. After these ports had 1 
fallen into our military possession, the blockade was raised, and 
C(;^ramerce with them permitted upon prescribed terms and condi- ■ 
tions. They were opened to the trade of all nations, upon the ' 
payment of duties more moderate in their amount than those which i 
had been previously levied by Mexico; and the revenue which was , 
formerly paid into the Mexican treasury was directed to be col- j 
lected by our military and naval officers, and applied to the use of j 
our army and navy. Care was taken that the officers, soldiers, and ' 
sailors of our army and navy should be exempted from the opera- 
tions of the order; and as the merchandise imported, upon which i 
the order operated, must be consumed by- Mexican citizens, the ; 
contributions exacted were, in effect, the seizure of the public re- 
venues of Mexico, and the application of them to our own use. In j 
directing this measure, the object was to co'mpel the enemy to i 
contribute, as far as practicable, towards the expenses of the i 
war." 

A copy of the order referred to, with the documents accompa- 
nying it, has been communicated to Congress. i 

The order operated upon the vessels and merchandise of all na- I 

tions, whether belonging to citizens of the United States, or to i 

foreigner?, arriving in any of the ports in Mexico in our military j 

occupation. The contributions levied were a tax upon the Mexi- { 
can citizens, who were the Consumers of the merchandise imported; 

but, for the permit or license granted by the order, all vessels and j 

merchandise belonging to citizens of the United States, were ne- j 

cessarily excluded from all commerce with Mexico from the com- j 

mencement of the war. The coasts and ports of Mexico were or- | 
dered to be placed under blockade on the day Congress declared 
the war to exist; and, by the law of nations, the blockade applied 

to the vessels of the United States as well as to the vessels of : 
all other nations. Had no blockade been declared, or had any of 
our merchant vessels entered any of the ports of Mexico not 



Ex. Doc. No. 20. 9 

blockaded, they would have been liable tobe seized and condemned 
as lawful prizes by the Mexican authorities. When the order was 
issued, it operated as a privilege to the vessels of the United 
States, as well as to those of foreign countries, to enter the ports 
held by our arms upon prescribed terms and conditions. It was 
altogether optional with citizens of the United States and foreign- 
ers to avail themselves of the privileges granted upon the terms 
prescribed. Citizens of the United States and foreigners have 
availed themselves of these privileges. 

No principle is better established than that a nation at war has 
the right of shifting the burden off itself, and imposing it on the 
enemy by exacting military contributions. The mode of making 
such exactions must be left to the discretion of the conquerer; but 
it should be exercised in a manner conformable to the rules of 
civilized warfare. 

The right to levy these contributions is essential to the success- 
ful prosecution of war in an enemy's country, and the practice of 
nations has been in accordance with this principle. It is as clearly 
necessary as the right to fight battles, and its exercise is often es- 
sential to the subsistence of the army. 

Entertaining no doubt that the military right to exclude com- 
merce altogether from the ports of the enemy in our military occu- 
pation, included the minor right of admitting it under prescribed 
conditions, it became an important question at the date of the 
order, whether there should be a discrimination between vessels 
and cargoes belonging to citizens of the United States, and vessels 
and cargoes belonging to neutral nations. Had the vessels and 
cargoes belonging to citizens of the United States been admitted 
without the payment of any duty, while a duty was levied on fo- 
reign vessels and cargoes, the object of the order would have been 
defeated. The whole commerce would have been conducted in 
American vesstls, no contributions could have been collected, aii I 
the enemy would have been furnished with goods without the ex- 
action from him of any contribution whatever, and would have 
been thus benefitted by our military occupation, instead of being 
made to feel the evils of the war. In order to levy these contri- 
butions, and to make them available for the support of the army, 
it became, therefore, absolutely necessary that they should be col- 
lected upon imports into Mexican ports, whether in vessels belong- 
ing to citizens of the United States or to foreigners. It was deemed 
proper to extend the privilege to vessels and their cargoes belong- 
ing to neutral nations. It has been my policy, since the commence- 
ment of the war with Mexico, to act justly and liberally towards 
all neutral nations, and to afford to them no just cause of complaint; 
and we have seen the good consequences of this policy by the ge- 
neral satisfaction which it has given. 

In answer to the inquiry contained in the resolution as to the 
rates of duties imposed, I refer you to the documents which accom- 
panied my annual^nessage of the 7th of December last, which con- 
tain the information. 

From the accompanying reports of the Secretary of War and the 
2 



IQ Ex. Doc. No. 20. 

Secretary of the Navy, it will be seen that the contributions have 
been collected on all vessels and cargoes, whether American or 
foreign hut the returns to the departments do not show with ex- 
aclne^ss'the amounts collected on American, as distinguishable from 
foreign vessels and merchandise. ^^^^^ ^ ^^^^ 

Washington, February 10, 1848. 



V-146 






O V'-. C^ 




^0 V, 








3^^ux. 













o, * , , , 









*" ^^' -^^ 









r. '^^0^ :, 













y -iQM^^^;'^ ^^^^0^' o^^^mT" ^^<y -^/m^^. ^^Mc$^ 



'bV" 



^°V 








v^^ 


























,V "'^^ •. 



^ .,W-,' X 



"^^ 'o » » 










<^" .o-.,/^0 "•** .^<i>\.v*., "<^^ "'* -"^ 



S\ ^*^..<.*'' :'M£^ \. ./ /^'v ^*..^*'' yMi'. \„.' 




""^ 
















^^^=^ -^sfA". *^._,/ z^^"-. **..** yji\%i£.'. \, 



